Rand Paul: Sanctions Would Ruin Iran Negotiations

A weekend presidential forum attended by several would-be 2016 candidates faced multiple calls for more sanctions and hostility toward Iran, along with bizarrely hysterical predictions of doom. Sen. Ted Cruz (R – TX) even predicted Iran would soon be able to nuke “Tel Aviv, New York or Los Angeles.”

Yet Sen. Rand Paul (R – KY) sought to separate himself from the pack by being opposed to the sanctions, noting, as so many have, that they would ruin the negotiations with Iran, and insisting he favors diplomacy over Iran’s nuclear program.

Paul challenged the others to take their hostility to the negotiations to a logical conclusion, asking if any of them were ready to commit 100,000 ground troops to an invasion of Iran.

Though some of the more hawkish candidates may indeed be comfortable with such a war, few are going to want to campaign on the idea of starting it, and that is why they’ve tried to couch the sanctions as a step short of war.

Godfather Obama has said several times that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. But his 16 intelligence agencies don't agree with him. But of course, he knows better than his own intelligence agencies.

Iran is several times larger in population and area compared to Iraq. Iran (Persia) is a real county, not a colonial slap up like Iraq. What does Rand Paul think he is going to do with 100,000 troops when three or four times that number could not secure Iraq? Try five or 10 times that number if there isn't any serious organized resistance, and that is a big "if".
On paper the US can win a war against either Iran or Russia. Only trouble is it will be difficult to tell the winners from the losers when the dust clears. A mountain of corpses and dept and nothing to show for it. – Iraq done large.